Re: [PATCH] pwm: Fix period and polarity in pwm_get() for non-perfect matches

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Thierry,

On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 10:20 AM, Thierry Reding
<thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Could we achieve the same by storing a pointer to the best match and
> then use that instead of p? Perhaps something like this:
>
>         struct pwm_lookup *entry;
>
>         ...
>
>                 if (match > best) {
>                         chip = pwmchip_find_by_name(p->provider);
>                         entry = p;
>
>                         if (match != 3)
>                                 best = match;
>                         else
>                                 break;
>                 }
>
>         ...
>
>         if (chip)
>                 pwm = pwm_request_from_chip(chip, entry->index,
>                                             con_id ?: dev_id);
>         if (IS_ERR(pwm))
>                 return pwm;
>
>         pwm_set_period(pwm, entry->period);
>         pwm_set_polarity(pwm, entry->polarity);
>
> ?

That's possible. But that will add complexity, as you have to move the
"mutex_unlock(&pwm_lookup_lock);" after the last user of "entry" again,
and add a goto for the IS_ERR(pwm) case.
So I'm not sure it's worth the effort.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/